<
>
Download

Hausübung
Philosophie

University of San Diego, San Diego

Wion 2016

Patricia S. ©
3.70

0.05 Mb
sternsternsternsternstern
ID# 78918







2


PHIL 116

Dr. Wion

14 December, 2018

Drug Use

Drug abuse has been a prevalent problem globally due to a drug’s ability to induce extreme euphoria, pain relief, psychedelic hallucinations and much more to the human body. The definition of a drug itself can be interpreted as a substance a person may ingest which can cause psychoactive reactions that may affect the person’s the brain and body in multiple of ways.

There is no doubt there is a negative connotation around the term “drugs”, whether it be a “hard” drug, “soft” drug or prescription drugs. A hard drug, such as meth and heroin, is considered to be more addictive and toxic than soft drugs such as marijuana. Because of the negative effects drugs may have on a person, the legalization of drugs has been a heated debate for many years.

The movement of the prohibition of drugs in America, for example, has undergone law revisions such as the legalization of marijuana (a soft drug). With the debate around drugs and its legality, it brings up a question of morality, if drug use is either moral or immoral.

Philosophers, such as Mill and Aristotle, are on opposite spectrums in regards to drug use and government control over them.

Before diving in to the two philosophers Mill and Aristotle, it is important to understand the facts and legality of drug use currently in the United States. The Controlled Substances Act is one of the federal U.S. drug law that regulates the “possession, trafficking and manufacturing of drugs”, which applies to both hard and soft drugs (1).

This act categorized drugs as Schedule I-V, Schedule I being the drugs with the highest potential for abuse (cocaine, meth, etc.) and Schedule V being the drugs with the lowest potential for abuse (codeine, cough medicine, etc.) (1). The charges of possession and trafficking of drugs are different.

Possession of drugs can be from a fine of at least $1,000 to jail time, depending on if it is a simple possession or possession with the intent of redistributing and reselling (1). Drug trafficking is a felony and the penalty varies and is dependent on how much drugs are being trafficked, where it’s going, whether it is soft or hard drugs, etc. (1).

Furthermore, each state has their own laws in regards to drug felonies and fines/jail time will vary (1). The regulation of drug use has made its way into the workplace as well, with drug testing laws and legal guidelines such as the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which lets employees and employers know when drug tests will be taken place (1).

With these laws and regulations, America’s drug prohibition movement is in full send.

John Stuart Mill and the Libertarians believed that drugs shouldn’t be illegal because of their belief in the Principle of Harm, which states that actions that can physically harm others should be legally prohibited. Because Mill and the Libertarians believed only actions that harm others can be illegal, they are against the illegalization of drugs.

Mills argues that most drugs have not been proven to cause harm to others around them; thus, adults have the right to ingest whatever they choose to due to their personal freedom. On another note, some believe that being addicted to drugs is a form of slavery. Because Mills and the Libertarians believe in personal freedom and maximizing individual freedom, they are against slavery.

There are people who argue that being addicted to drugs is a form of slavery because the person is essentially losing control because of the addictive drugs. The focal point of a just society is to maximize individual freedom and slavery is opposite of that. But this arises the question: is addiction a form of slavery? To be considered free, we have to be able to control our actions and realize that we contain the power to decide how to act.

In contrast to Mill and the Libertarians’ take on drugs, Aristotle believed in virtue ethics in which he believes that to be moral is to be a person of good character and have the virtues of a good person. A person who abuses drugs, whether hard or soft drugs, shows a lack of personal care and control, therefore it is immoral in Aristotle’s eyes.

Aristotle follows the Principle of Morality, in which is state that some actions (drug use) are so clearly immoral that it should be illegal. Because of how immoral drugs are in Aristotle’s eyes, he believed both hard and soft drugs that are not prescription drugs should be illegal due to the fact that the law should reinforce morality to citizens.

In fact, in America the use and possession of drugs has been prohibited. Many are in jail due to either use or possession of drugs, both soft and hard drugs, which is the leading cause of the crowding of prisons. Though soft drugs such as marijuana have started been legalized, there are still problems with recreational use of prescription drugs.

It can be implied that Aristotle is also against abuse of prescription drugs due to the Principle of Morality and his belief in what a moral person should be and do. Contrasting Mills and the Libertarians, Aristotle has a different perspective in drug use and standpoint of whether it is moral or immoral.

In addition to the principles both Mill and Aristotle stood for, there are other arguments for and against drug use. One principle that is against drug use is the Principle of Paternalism. The Principle of Paternalism states that because drugs can be harmful to the human body, the government should step in and save people from themselves the drug abuse.

Another principle that is also against the use of drugs would be the Principle of Offensiveness, which states that some actions are so clearly offensive to so many others that it should be illegal. This can be correlative to the use of drugs in public and offending people that has to observe this act.

In my opinion, drug use is not an immoral action if no one else is affected or harmed by this action, which goes back to the Principle of Harm. If a person chooses to abuse drugs, it is their personal choice and we must respect others’ free will and choice. Everyone has a right to their own body and the choices they make which leads to the point of government regulation of drugs.

My position of drug use is a Libertarian view, in which I view this situation as each person is free to make their own decisions so long as they don’t harm others. Drugs should only ever be illegal if it violates the Principle of Harm. The solution of drug use is definitely not black and white.

The answer is gray. Everyone has free will and freedom but of course, we do not want to see anyone become addicted to hard drugs and make wrong decisions. Whether it be hard or soft drugs being abused, we are still all responsible for our own bodies and cannot have a say in what a person wants to do with theirs.

All in all, the debate of drug use and whether it is moral or immoral will be answered differently by each person answering. To Mill and Libertarians, drug use shouldn’t be considered immoral unless it is directly/physically affecting others. To Aristotle, drug use is immoral because it shows lack of personal care.

In my personal opinion, I believe drug use shouldn’t be considered immoral because that person is not affecting others around them and they are acting on their free will and choice to abuse these drugs. As said before, the solution to drug use is neither black or white, it is gray.

There will never be a right solution because everyone’s interpretation of moral/immoral are different. Essentially, drug abuse will still remain a big debate between citizens, the government and the idea/interpretation of morality.


1. “Guide to U.S. Drug Laws.” Recovery.org, 18 Aug. 2018,


| | | | |
Tausche dein Hausarbeiten